Edward Synge, friend and father

The Episcopal Throne in the ruined Cathedral of Elphin(c) Vox Hiberionacum, with permission

Edward Synge was born around 1690 and died in Dublin on the 27th January, 1762. He was the son of the elder Edward Synge, who was himself involved in the philosophical debates of the time.

He was educated in Trinity College Dublin (M.A. in 1712 and D.D. in 1728) and after being chancellor of St. Patrick’s (1726), was successively bishop of Clonfert (1730), Cloyne (1731), Ferns (1733), and finally Elphin (1740 until his death).

Synge was close to Francis Hutcheson and appears to have been a member of the Molesworth Circle. He assisted Hutcheson in developing revising his work and Hutcheson himself acknowledged that Synge had devised the general scheme of “Inquiry into Beauty and Virtue” before Hutcheson. The connection seems to have continued after Hutcheson’s departure for Glasgow and until his death, since his son dedicated the posthumous collection of his father’s works to Synge 1. Letters from the 1760s from Edward Synge giving advice to the younger Hutcheson still exist.

Synge was also friendly with George Berkeley who, like Hutcheson, was living in Dublin at the same time.

Despite his connections, Synge’s work in philosophy is minor, and is centred in the areas of moral and political philosophy. He argued for limited toleration (as his father before him had done), most notably in the sermon of 23rd October 1725 which he preached to the members of the House of Commons while prebendary of St Patricks. The sermon drew acclaim and was printed. It also drew vehement disagreement from the Church of Ireland vicar of Naas, Stephen Radcliffe, who wrote a 45 page pamphlet opposing the arguments of the sermon. Edward Synge wrote a vindication of his sermon in reply, along with a detailed outline of a possible oath that might be acceptable to Catholics2

Stephen Radcliffe advocated using force against those who were unorthodox in their religious opinions. Synge argued that force ought not be used by magistrates against the religiously unorthodox “if the publick civil interests are in no way affected”, aligning himself with Locke (and Francis Hutcheson). Like Locke, however, while he says everyone has a right to worship according to his conscience, atheists are beyond the pale since their beliefs are destructive of society. But otherwise “all persons in a society, whose principles of religion have no tendency to hurt the public, have a right to a toleration.”3

In his reply to Radcliffe and following in his father’s footsteps, Synge put forward his own version of an oath that might be acceptable to Catholics, and a proposal that the country accommodate 500 secular priests to serve the Catholic community. He made no other proposals regarding the Penal Laws, but noted that the limitations put on Catholic ownership of land meant they turned to trade, and held their wealth in money. Money was not as good a guarantor of their peaceful behaviour as money, and money could be used in revolt more readily4